Matt A. Barreto

Associate Professor, Political Science

Current Research Projects: Voting Rights

In Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 US 30 (1986) the Supreme Court interpreted Section 2 of the recently amended Voting Rights Act (1965),
making analysis of racially polarized voting necessary to examine two of three elements related to minority vote dilution. In addition to
geographic compactness, the court established minority political cohesiveness and white bloc voting as pre-conditions that can be determined
through racial bloc voting analysis. In Gingles, the now familiar definition of racially polarized voting was framed as occurring when there
is a “consistent relationship between race of a voter and the way in which the voter votes.” Put simply, racially polarized voting occurs
when minority and non-minority voters, considered separately, would have elected different candidates to office. Related and implicit to
this inquiry, is whether or not the minority group in question constitutes a “politically cohesive unit.” If minorities did not behave as a
cohesive unit at the polls, evidence of racially polarized voting on the part of non-minorities would be difficult to find.